Tim Leunig on Darlington is doing the HS2 problem of merging the fixing of multiple problems into a single project which massively increases the total figure to justify cancellation.
Yes there is a new station and car park but the reason for them are 1 - expensive improvements to straighten the tracks at Darlington, 2 removing (most) Teesside services from touching the ECML. That requires moving the station to the East which makes the old carpark useless.
So the station is then a relatively cheap change to facilitate line improvements. And the irony is that for me the service will deteriorate as if it is raining I will now have to stand in the rain to catch my train (they ran out of money so the new platforms don't have a roof all the way down the platform).
I find this a weak argument Ben. I just travelled through Darlington, saw the signs advertising the works and Googled it. What terrible value for money! This is real pork barrel politics - the spending of money on dubious projects just local politicians can boast they brought cash to their local area. I can't see there will be much additional rail use as a result of the spend.
For that we get ECML improvements (4 additional mainline trains an hour) and the ability to run trains to a better than hourly service to Teesside).
As fro the rest the budget isn't that bad. From what I gather a new passenger bridge at Amersham cost £5m...
Now that is not to say Ben Houchen isn't an expert on wasting money (he is) but the Darlington station project is a typical UK one of multiple projects combined into 1 break the cost into it's individual parts which are intentionally hidden and a number of parts will be justifiable with 1 or 2 that are high for reasons that probably make sense once you see the detail.
Hello, Bromley resident here. Last time this came up, the leader of the council said that if the Tube was extended into the borough it would lead to the "manhattanisation" of Bromley. As if Manhattan is a bad place? *eyeroll* Bromley Tories are already firmly against it and any development will have to happen over their heads. It's hard enough just getting a new zebra crossing outside of a school down here...
Worth noting that the BRS only paid for about a third of the Elizabeth Line, and is going to be levied until 2037 (I think that's the latest end date) because it was disproportionately used to fund the cost overruns. Given it will be needed for Crossrail 2 as well it's not going to cover a high proportion of TfL's major schemes. The key point is that it is a basket of funding that made Crossrail possible (inc. BRS, CIL, direct taxpayer, developer contributions, borrowing against revenue) and I think that is the model for the future and the Treasury has to be included, because it is useful to have them bought in.
This isn't the point of your piece but as a digression it's hard not to feel like that abrupt turn at Elmers End to finish at Hayes was designed to skirt Croydon. It was under Johnson’s City Hall that those 2015 plans were published and there is more than a whiff of pork-barrel politics in avoiding a very Labour borough to stay in true-blue Bromley. I know nothing of civil engineering and presumably the geology makes this the only viable route. But you’ll forgive my conspiratorial leaning given that handbrake turn is so directly on the borough's boundary.
But then it’s good to see Labour Together work out from infrastructure logic rather than party politics. So long of course that we aren't accepting as settled transport logic something with a partisan flaw at its heart. Because unless construction in Croydon is impossible then why would you avoid the capital’s largest borough and home to one of the busiest rail interchanges in the country? Granted we are well connected above ground (albeit unfairly marooned in Zone 5), but if spending all that money on the Bakerloo extension is to handle both growth and balance it just seems odd not to include Croydon too.
I think this is a misunderstanding of the nature of the scheme beyond Lewisham. From that point onwards, the project is meant to take over the currently under-used national rail line via Lower Sydenham to Beckenham Junction and Hayes. It turns at Elmers End because the current line turns there. There used to be a line running straight on from Elmers End towards Croydon but in 2000 it was turned over to Croydon Tramlink. Given that there would be an interchange at Elmers End between Tramlink and the Bakerloo Line, I don't think the project would damage transport in Croydon.
Love the article but object to Catford being referred to as an ‘obscure London suburb’! That’s zone 1/2 / ‘you can only possibly live a life worth living on the tube’ truther talk 🤣. It’s quicker to get here from Charing Cross than lots of trendy parts of zone 2/3 North London.
If we ever get the BLU I’ll be happy for the frequency (12-18 tph vs 4-5 from Catford Bridge station and 3-4 per hour from Catford Station). But our journey times will be longer, and I’m not convinced they’ll be more pleasant than the currently air conditioned 11-minute train where I mostly get some sunlight and a seat. I don’t agree with them but that’s what a lot of the Bromley NIMBYs object to and to be fair I think they have a point.
Tim Leunig on Darlington is doing the HS2 problem of merging the fixing of multiple problems into a single project which massively increases the total figure to justify cancellation.
Yes there is a new station and car park but the reason for them are 1 - expensive improvements to straighten the tracks at Darlington, 2 removing (most) Teesside services from touching the ECML. That requires moving the station to the East which makes the old carpark useless.
So the station is then a relatively cheap change to facilitate line improvements. And the irony is that for me the service will deteriorate as if it is raining I will now have to stand in the rain to catch my train (they ran out of money so the new platforms don't have a roof all the way down the platform).
I find this a weak argument Ben. I just travelled through Darlington, saw the signs advertising the works and Googled it. What terrible value for money! This is real pork barrel politics - the spending of money on dubious projects just local politicians can boast they brought cash to their local area. I can't see there will be much additional rail use as a result of the spend.
Have you seen the budget - because I have - although it's hard to find public information. - £98m of it is rail works see https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/bridge-successfully-installed-at-darlington-station-as-part-of-gbp-140m-transformation
For that we get ECML improvements (4 additional mainline trains an hour) and the ability to run trains to a better than hourly service to Teesside).
As fro the rest the budget isn't that bad. From what I gather a new passenger bridge at Amersham cost £5m...
Now that is not to say Ben Houchen isn't an expert on wasting money (he is) but the Darlington station project is a typical UK one of multiple projects combined into 1 break the cost into it's individual parts which are intentionally hidden and a number of parts will be justifiable with 1 or 2 that are high for reasons that probably make sense once you see the detail.
Hello, Bromley resident here. Last time this came up, the leader of the council said that if the Tube was extended into the borough it would lead to the "manhattanisation" of Bromley. As if Manhattan is a bad place? *eyeroll* Bromley Tories are already firmly against it and any development will have to happen over their heads. It's hard enough just getting a new zebra crossing outside of a school down here...
I wish Substack had emoji responses like WhatsApp, as I’d definitely give this a ‘😩’.
Has he never been to Harrow - it's basically Bromley but closer to Heathrow...
Worth noting that the BRS only paid for about a third of the Elizabeth Line, and is going to be levied until 2037 (I think that's the latest end date) because it was disproportionately used to fund the cost overruns. Given it will be needed for Crossrail 2 as well it's not going to cover a high proportion of TfL's major schemes. The key point is that it is a basket of funding that made Crossrail possible (inc. BRS, CIL, direct taxpayer, developer contributions, borrowing against revenue) and I think that is the model for the future and the Treasury has to be included, because it is useful to have them bought in.
This isn't the point of your piece but as a digression it's hard not to feel like that abrupt turn at Elmers End to finish at Hayes was designed to skirt Croydon. It was under Johnson’s City Hall that those 2015 plans were published and there is more than a whiff of pork-barrel politics in avoiding a very Labour borough to stay in true-blue Bromley. I know nothing of civil engineering and presumably the geology makes this the only viable route. But you’ll forgive my conspiratorial leaning given that handbrake turn is so directly on the borough's boundary.
But then it’s good to see Labour Together work out from infrastructure logic rather than party politics. So long of course that we aren't accepting as settled transport logic something with a partisan flaw at its heart. Because unless construction in Croydon is impossible then why would you avoid the capital’s largest borough and home to one of the busiest rail interchanges in the country? Granted we are well connected above ground (albeit unfairly marooned in Zone 5), but if spending all that money on the Bakerloo extension is to handle both growth and balance it just seems odd not to include Croydon too.
I think this is a misunderstanding of the nature of the scheme beyond Lewisham. From that point onwards, the project is meant to take over the currently under-used national rail line via Lower Sydenham to Beckenham Junction and Hayes. It turns at Elmers End because the current line turns there. There used to be a line running straight on from Elmers End towards Croydon but in 2000 it was turned over to Croydon Tramlink. Given that there would be an interchange at Elmers End between Tramlink and the Bakerloo Line, I don't think the project would damage transport in Croydon.
Thanks for the extra context!
Love how your ‘ego’ gets its own authors note:)
Love the article but object to Catford being referred to as an ‘obscure London suburb’! That’s zone 1/2 / ‘you can only possibly live a life worth living on the tube’ truther talk 🤣. It’s quicker to get here from Charing Cross than lots of trendy parts of zone 2/3 North London.
If we ever get the BLU I’ll be happy for the frequency (12-18 tph vs 4-5 from Catford Bridge station and 3-4 per hour from Catford Station). But our journey times will be longer, and I’m not convinced they’ll be more pleasant than the currently air conditioned 11-minute train where I mostly get some sunlight and a seat. I don’t agree with them but that’s what a lot of the Bromley NIMBYs object to and to be fair I think they have a point.